The Free Agency Thread

How aggressive in Free Agency?

  • Pay big for 1 or 2 impact starters!

    Votes: 2 20.0%

  • Build depth with value mid-tier players

    Votes: 8 80.0%

  • Prioritize re-signing our own free agents

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    10
Boone said:
I think we already brought in his replacement.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but I still root for the kid. Besides, we only liked Chinn enough to offer him one year which is barely an endorsement.
 
He’s had some durability challenges… it is interesting that we’ve done so many 1 year contracts… not sure what to make of that?

I think we all like Curl but he doesn’t seem motivated to stay. No idea what the new regime thinks.
 
Ultimately, I think the short term deals speak to the fact that this FO has supreme confidence in themselves to build through the draft. Obviously, not all of our FA additions are going to stick long term. Some will, but those who don't will have hand picked draftees who will be ready to hopefully step in and contribute without being rushed to develop. For now though, I think our additions through FA give us a nice mix of remaining relatively competitive in 2024, while also providing the roster with some players that we could grow with and could stick long term when this team hopefully starts competing in the NFC.
 
I think what the new regime thinks is this in re Kam Curl:

Peters: We are not going to franchise and give top 5 AVV to ANY player off a 4-13 team. We are willing to discuss negotiating a multi-year deal but at a more 'reasonable' level given that you have not made a pro bowl or an all pro team yet.

Curl's agent: Kam is going to get a top 5-6 type offer in free agency and this team is not ready to contend for a title where a hometown discount may be considered, so we are moving on.

The result: so far a NUMBER of NFL teams have released high visibility veteran safeties who have made pro bowls or all pro teams and will likely sign deals for millions of dollars less than Curl was looking for.

So, Washington MAY end up biting on a veteran safety (maybe not) but in the end result it appears Curl overestimated the safety market and a top 5 contract is likely not in the offing this cycle for him based on his play.

He's a solid player, but he's not Minkah Fitzpatrick.
 
If Curl would have taken Chinn's money, i have to think the team would have signed him...

and we already did bite on a veteran safety
 
Boone said:
He’s had some durability challenges… it is interesting that we’ve done so many 1 year contracts… not sure what to make of that?

I think we all like Curl but he doesn’t seem motivated to stay. No idea what the new regime thinks.
Click to expand...
I think the one year deals reflect on the fact that so many of the players they found worthy of signing were fourth rounders. We're used to the draft being bereft of contributors and it being a miracle if anyone outside of the first round ever contributes (exaggeration). I think Peter's mindset is his third, fourth, and fifth rounders with a year of practice and coaching should be able to step up and step in.
 
By veteran safety, I mean a high visibility guy like Simmons or other who has been recognized in the league for his performance over time.

I would rate Curl higher (remember Chinn has had injury issues 2 of the past 3 seasons) and he SHOULD net a contract greater than Chinn's, but again he is in that top 10-15 range at safety, not in the top 5-6.

I think this is another example of a younger player whose agent has gotten in his ear and poured some honey, convincing him he is an emerging star.

While there is certainly upside for Curl and could ascend to being a better player than he is now at 25, he has not done it long enough at a high level to garner the type of deal his agent was expecting to see.

Watch when he signs.

He will get a solid contract, but it won't be close to the safeties generally recognized to be franchise players around the league.
 
Even where the contracts are longer than 1year many are structured to be favorable for the team to cut bait if needed.

As an example: Nick Allegretti- 3 years/16m

Cap Hit- Year 1 $3.6m, Year 2 $4.5m, Year 3 $8m (rounding up)

Cutting the player after Year 2 would only cost the team $1.9m ($6m in savings)
 
Let's all be honest here.

Signing a free agent safety to a $14 or $15AVV contract is not likely to move the needle in terms of this team's rebuild in 2024 and probably 2025 as well.

If Washington were a Baltimore or Kansas City, the thought process might be different and those teams might have resigned Curl, backloading the contract to allow those clubs to compete in 2024 and 2025 and bring in additional players, etc.

I am of the opinion that Adam Peters would NOT have resigned Daron Payne to a $90M contract if he had been here in 2023 and likely would have traded his rights for picks, coming off a career season.

And to be fair that's what it was, a career season for Payne. To me he has little chance of getting back to those numbers in 2024 or beyond. He's still a solid DT, but he is not a value players for us.

His contract is a level above what his on the field performance shows us week to week.

While every team ends up with one of two of those, the goal of teams like the Ravens and 49ers is to have as FEW of these top 5 deals as possible.

I remember the 49ers trading Brentson Buckner at DT when the team had a bevy of starters all under 30.

He is a very good player no doubt, but the idea of resigning him to a big time contract and backloading the dollars was not really an option as the team saw other players whose rookie deals would be up in 1-2 years and monies were needed to retain them.
 
My guess is that the number will vary a bit depending on whose site you are reading but this should be in the ball park.

 
I do agree with Marcus Spears that the best teams often do their work after the draft in that second stage of free agency, when veterans get released because high draft picks come in and are working at a high level cheaper.

That may very well be the reason Peters is doling out the money using a 'shotgun' approach rather than a sniper rifle where we aim at 2 or 3 players and spend a good chunk of that money the first week in March.
 
Reaves was a player worth bringing back. He's recognized as a top player for what he does and he doesn't complain about the adversity he has faced in coming back from some bad luck with injuries. He also plays anywhere the coaches have a need even if it is a real stretch for his skills in coverage against some very good players.
 
Neophyte said:
My guess is that the number will vary a bit depending on whose site you are reading but this should be in the ball park.

Click to expand...


Spotrac has it at $55m with the rookie pool allotment figured in.
 
If my count is correct, we have signed 13 guys, 3 of which are pure special teamers. That's almost 25 percent of Peters' signing that have been devoted to upgrading an often overlooked unit on the first two and a half days of FA. Our GM has earned even more of my respect.
 
Now if we can only find a punt returner that actually threatens a coverage unit.

We have had year after year of the Dax Milne type players that have solid hands but no speed and elusiveness.

I remember back to a time when Brian Mitchell and Mike Nelms would GIVE the offense great field position with a a key return to set up a victory.

We never see that anymore.

Now that we have signed a veteran kicker and long snapper to go with retaining Reaves, I hope the next step is to find a return man.
 
They did resign Kaz Allen before FA opened. He looked dangerous last year in pre-season.
 
If we were gonna sign a vet, this would’ve been my guy and it’s not close.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Help Users

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top